News Category: Articles by Wendeen Eolis

Mr. Frank has barely left the podium announcing his own Internet Gambling bill which is designed to attack the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act which was passed late last year. Ms. Berkley and Mr. Porter were among Mr. Frank’s near dozen co-sponsors last week.

The Nevada duo, Berkley and Porter, are co-chairs of the Congressional Gaming Caucus. Prior to submitting their bill, they proved to be very effective in building support on both sides of the aisle for the study bill, garnering thus far some 60 co-sponsors for their proposed legislation.

Congresswoman Berkley talked to me at length shortly before the introduction of the Study bill, explaining its appeal, regardless of how her colleagues previously voted last year on the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. She insists that everyone in Congress should support getting the facts right and focus on understanding this business which has grown into a multi-billion dollar industry around the world in just a few short years.

She says the study will be conducted by the independent and highly regarded National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Her office has offered as part of a public statement, “It will be the basis for a report to lawmakers on a wide range of issues that involve Internet gaming, including advances in technology, regulation in other countries, and the impact of the current federal on-line gambling ban in the United States.”

PPA President Michael Bolcerek, spoke to me this afternoon to confirm that PPA considers the Study bill to be positive in so far as “it moves the needle in the right direction” but emphasizes that “his group would like it to move faster and thinks that it can.”

As I reported several weeks ago, I can now confirm that the Berkley/Porter Study bill will be referred to the Judiciary Committee and other committees are likely to get into the fray in the near future. Stay tuned for my further assessment of the bill after my next discussion with her scheduled for later today…

Wendeen Eolis advises commercial and online gaming companies as part of her legal business/ contract negotiations consulting practices. She currently serves as Vice-Chair of the World Poker Association and chairs its Government Relations Committee. Ms. Eolis is also an internationally recognized tournament poker player; she was elected to the WPT’s Inaugural Professional Poker Tour and has cashed in five WSOP events. Her published articles are read in poker and legal journals Visit eolis.com for info on her upcoming manual, Secrets of the People Reader. This article is an adaptation of material that may be part of Ms. Eolis’ forthcoming book, Power Poker Dame.

IGREA is an innovative frontal assault on UIGEA

Representative Frank attacks the pertinent portions of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) without any attempt to repeal it. He focuses on the issue of credit cards for online gambling payments—a matter that falls squarely within the control of the Financial Services Committee’s portfolio. And he offers up his own plan for the future of online gaming with provisions for licensing and regulating it.

The Congressman recently summarized his decision to carry the IGREA flag, explaining, “I spend a lot of time worrying about how to protect people from others, but I have no more time to worry about protecting people from themselves.”

Poker players’ voices are rising

Michael Bolcerek, President of the Poker Players Alliance, applauds Frank’s legislation. He crows, “We are very excited about this bill.” Bolcerek claims his association has 442,000 + members, and he anticipates attracting another fifty thousand within a matter of weeks. Of late, Mr. Frank appears to be impressed with the potential political power of online poker players.

A few short weeks ago, the Massachusetts Senator made a public point of shunning any collaboration on his bill with the online poker industry, and in particular with PPA Chairman, former Senator Alfonse D’Amato. During that same period, he noted that he would not consider a specific poker carve out in his legislation, explaining he was not persuaded of any reason to distinguish poker from blackjack.

This week, however a seemingly more enlightened Frank has seen fit to make repeated public references to the mushrooming resentment of American-based poker players over government efforts to crush online gaming by American residents. Two days ago, in an interview on National Public Radio, he told his listeners that there are a lot of poker players out there who are angered by the bureaucratic attempts to deprive them of the right to choose a little Texas Hold’em after dinner—from the comfort of a cyberspace seat in their homes.

In comments following his press conference last Thursday, Mr. Frank also showed a grasp of the swelling grassroots movement among poker players across the country. He suggested that poker players may not be known for having gone to the polls before, but predicts that next time around, they will be there in droves, ready to pull the voting lever likeliest to take anti-gambling politicians down.

IGREA is on a slow track

While Frank’s recent comments are heartwarming in the online poker community, his commitment to working toward passage of this bill, is hardly set in stone. Last week while in Brussels, he highlighted this point after meeting with European Union Commissioner for Internal Market and Services, Charlie McCreevy. Mr. Frank said that part of the purpose of his bill is to test the level of support for it, but that no major victory was likely any time soon. He added that his bill is not focused on the broader issues raised by recent World Trade Organization rulings. He said, “My committee only has jurisdiction over credit cards.”

Representative Frank’s narrowly bounded tour de force has been an obvious labor of love and drama during the past several weeks. IGREA of 2007 addresses several issues of varying merit that are raised by anti-gambling groups: potential money laundering, gambling addiction and perhaps most heatedly, as of late, underage gambling at online poker sites.

Mr. Frank noted in his press conference last Thursday, in addition to an enforcement framework, with provisions to license and regulate online gambling, there are also appropriate opt-outs available to individual states, Indian tribes, and sports leagues.

Gambling law expert Chuck Humphrey offers insights

Gambling law expert Chuck Humphrey comments on the new bill as follows: “The Frank bill brings two improvements to the online gambling arena: It creates a licensing authority for online gaming operators that applies on a nationwide, rather than a state-by-state basis and it solves the conundrum created in last year’s Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of legal online gaming being able to be conducted only in a single state at any one time.” Humphrey added, “The present text of the bill has some significant internal inconsistencies and apparent oversights that will need to be corrected in Congressional committee sessions. One such example; states can opt out of allowing a licensed operator to offer online gaming to its residents. But, it is not clear whether the test is that a state must specifically permit one or more forms of online gambling or whether the only requirement is that a state not have a law specifically prohibiting a given form of online gaming.”

Where is D’Amato?

The gambling industry’s generally high-kicking celebration of the Frank bill is not necessarily universal, however. Even within the increasingly united ranks of the online poker world, at least one high-profile online poker entrepreneur is reserved about Frank’s proposed legislation. He says, “With only 11 states in which private sector gambling is legal, I’m not sure that in the end we will get very far, if states have an opt-out provision.”

Mr. D’Amato, who is leading the charge as the PPA’s chairman and chief flak, has been a man of few public words lately, giving little more than polite lip service and serving up nice platitudes to the Frank bill. He has said, “It’s a common sense approach.” From inside the Beltway, comes word that D’Amato and the PPA may be more excited about Florida Representative Robert Wexler’s imminent plans to submit a poker carve-out bill.

If D’Amato helps to get the UIGEA undone, not only does he complete his mission for the PPA, but he also stands to earn a “knock your socks off” bonus directly from some online operators—according to a big player in the off shore online poker business.

Frank is center stage

For the moment, Frank has put IGREA in the spotlight, and he is basking in the attention it brings on his civil libertarian views. He seems to be unconcerned about all that is going on in the wings.

For example, so far, Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid appears to be standing pat, signaling continued support for just one piece of gambling legislation-a study bill that is slated for introduction by Nevada Representative Shelley Berkley next week. Representative Berkley’s anticipated bill may come almost directly on the heels of Frank’s bill; it is unclear as to whether or not it will steal some of Barney Frank’s thunder. And then there are the increasingly audible rumblings emanating from Mr. Wexler’s office, where the friendliest bill to poker may be gestating.

Both Ms. Berkley and Mr. Wexler are among the 11 co-sponsors of Frank’s bill. According to the spokesperson for the American Ganing Association, high profile casino leaders are taking a hard look at the Frank legislation this week. Mr. Frank is certainly having a bright moment in the sun.

Berkley stands tall

Yesterday I caught up with Shelley Berkley over lunch. We both chose sushi. It was a Dutch treat deal with her on a cell phone in Las Vegas and I on my mobile in New York. We talked about the week that was in online gaming quarters.

Ms. Berkley had not made it to Frank’s press conference in Washington, but she was totally in the loop on the day’s activities and the events that led up to her and her colleagues’ decisions to line up as co-sponsors of the IGREA bill. She said, “I am cautiously optimistic about it.”

“Can the PPA play a positive role here?” I inquired. She warned that the PPA members must come out in force and make their voices heard with their representatives. “Is D’Amato an asset in the process?” I then asked. She moved the conversation away from D’Amato, but offered more generally, “It is the PPA membership, in a compelling grass roots movement of its own, more than lobbyists, who will create the real prospect of victory in this fight.”

We returned to the subject of the Frank bill. The Congresswoman praises his effort “to ignite the debate” that should have taken place before UIGEA was considered for a vote last year.

Robert Wexler is at stage right

Online poker players are still hopeful of a fast and complete rescue—in an unfettered poker carve-out from UIGEA; one that excludes poker from any gambling prohibitions, by treating it as a game of skill. This is the road that Representative Wexler is reportedly poised to travel. Passage of a bill based on this strategy is a near-term long shot according to most everyone’s calculations on the Hill. But the jury is still out as to who is whistling Dixie and who will actually make headway in Congress with favorable online gambling legislation this year.

I figured it out remembering additional verse from Longfellow’s memorable words: “on the 18th of April in Seventy-five.” He let me know I was on track with the April 18th target date to get cracking in the halls of Congress, explaining that the legislators would all be back in Washington after a two-week recess.

Congressman Frank seeks relief, now

Congressman Barney Frank assured me he will get beyond mere rhetoric and move swiftly against the “stupid” provisions of the UIGEA, which attempts to end online betting by American-based players. He has previously called the recent legislation one of the stupidest laws ever passed. Now he is fully focused on its affront to any freedom-loving citizen. This latter point makes him see red. It bodes well for online and commercial gaming interests who need a powerful advocate in the thick of the political maelstrom.

A seasoned member of the House of Representatives, Congressman Frank ascended to the Chairmanship of the House Financial Services Committee when the Democrats won control of the Chamber last December. He is smart and has significant clout to go with his fearless style of getting out front on issues, no matter how controversial. “A bill will be filed later this month,” he says.

Frank’s motto is “be prepared”

For the moment he is doing his homework, part of his well-known modus operandi. He explained that he is consulting widely before moving forward with the drafting of legislation which will include but not be limited to a poker carve out from UIGEA. While the Congressman has previously noted, publicly, that he has no plans to work with Alfonse D’Amato on this matter, the former Senator and recently elected Chairman of the Poker Players Alliance has told me, directly, that he and Mr. Frank have at least, “touched base during the past week.”

Perhaps the explanation for the less than enthusiastic embrace of the PPA’s Chairman lies in the Congressman’s openly stated interest in getting some ideas and drafting advice from another former senator from New York, Tom Downey. Mr. Downey, a Democrat from Mr. D’Amato’s neighboring Suffolk County served in Congress from 1974-1993. Since then he has become a highly respected Washington insider as the Chairman of the Downey McGrath Group, Inc.

Congressman Frank is also consulting on big picture issues – relevant to the shot across the brow of UIGEA – with Southern Nevada Congresswoman, Shelley Berkley. Mr. Frank will now lead the charge and is determined to put forth a bill that will stay focused in the Financial Services Committee, according to Ms. Berkley who sounded genuinely excited about the planned cooperation between their two offices.

Berkley has a well-channeled ego

Moments before I left for Europe, last Sunday, Ms. Berkley rang me. We spoke briefly about the changing dynamics in dealing with both the common ground and divergent interests of her poker guys and her casino constituents. She said she was at Mr. Frank’s disposal to assist and to give him important feedback as he moves forward in the development of a bill. She expects to stand shoulder to shoulder with him (she’ll use stilts) in attacking the outrageous provisions of the UIGEA. The present game plan is for the ‘Frank bill’ to go forward before Berkley takes a further look at a study bill that would examine online gaming issues for future purposes.

A poker carve out from UIGEA as a clean separate bill looks as if it is dead as a door nail, but a bigger and more forceful bill is on a well lit horizon; leave it to Congressman Frank to keep it narrow enough to stay tightly within the reins of his committee.

Alfonse D’Amato is poised to zig and zag

PPA Chairman Senator Al D’Amato tells me the political process is inevitably filled with twists and turns. He says he will be staying on top of the situation, and promises to further enlighten me on his advocacy in Washington and recommendations to the poker community so as to enhance the prospects of success. We may see a bill from Frank or Berkley or both, but for sure Alfonse D’Amato will be in the background, pitching the cause of online gaming interests. He has assured the PPA he is going to earn his keep.

As first reported by Poker Player (February 16th), Senator D’Amato is on board as the Chairman of the PPA, an organization that has set itself up to be the voice of online poker gaming interests. Today, the PPA has been graced with a story in the New York Times that confirms Mr. D’Amato’s presence on the scene. The paper of record is even handed, but not Mr. D’Amato’s best friend in its article. He will undoubtedly soon receive a puffier welcome from another publication the PPA handpicked for an exclusive interview with him.

“When the going gets tough, the tough get going!”

Undeterred by the PPA’s continuing coyness, and the exclusive interview it has reportedly given to a poker journalist who is a member of the PPA Board, I called the organization’s President, Michael Bolcerek last week. I was looking for an update for the same poker community that the PPA wants in its membership ranks. What might be the organization’s battle plans to free online poker from the potential shackles of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act of 2006? UIGEA attempts to end online betting by American-based players. Mr. Bolcerek was inexplicably tight-lipped about the PPA’s anticipated savior and mum as to its next major steps.

I took my leave from the PPA president’s politely played game of dodge ball, before hopping on an airplane to Washington. While in the Capitol for business matters and a variety of political events on both sides of the aisle, I began to probe the poker industry’s odds of getting relief from the perils of UIGEA.

Multi-tasking in the Capitol

During the course of my visit, I donned many different hats; as business executive, politico, chairman of the government affairs committee of the World Poker Association, part-time poker journalist, and moonlighting poker pro. I saw opportunities to press the flesh as obligations to dig for information on the state of poker, while looking forward to Mr. Bolcerek and his PPA group getting their ducks in a row.

Shelley Berkley: Power Poker Player

All counted, I had more than a dozen meetings with elected officials and political operatives while I was there, but none was more instructive than the one with Congresswoman Shelley Berkley. Congresswoman Berkley welcomed my queries, completely unfazed by my switching hats from one moment to the next. She never grumbled over the fact that I am not a Nevadan. She did point out however, that members of Congress have an overriding duty to pay attention to the voices of constituents. She also stunned me with a simple fact of life in politics: the strength of an association’s voice rests with the number of members that are registered to vote.

In my half hour meeting with the senior member of Nevada’s congressional delegation in the House of Representatives, Shelley Berkley proved to be one smart cookie. She has a thoughtful, no nonsense approach as she considers the issues of her less than synchronized flock of gaming and gambling businesses. She is forthright in her support of her “poker guys.” But not for a minute does she lead me to think she will waver in her substantial commitment to the brick and mortar operators in her district. They were there long before online gaming heated up.

Is a Poker Carve-Out in the cards?

The commercial casino interests are represented by the formidably funded American Gaming Association. Frank Fahrenkopf, a highly regarded and powerfully connected lawyer, is the longtime president of the AGA. He was close to President Ronald Reagan and has represented Wayne (“Mr. Las Vegas”) Newton. He knows the gaming business inside out. Suffice to say Mr. Fahrenkopf’s group has not rushed to the aid of the poker lobby. The gaming industry is behind a study bill for its own purposes. It will soon be introduced in the House of Representatives. Capitol insiders are consistent in saying that poker interests have no real prospect of changing the present course,which is to let a poker carve-out bill fall by the wayside in favor of the commercial gaming industry’s interests in a bill to study the bigger picture of online gaming.

Implied Odds of PPA/AGA Cooperation

It would now seem timely for the PPA to make nice with the AGA, even if it elongates the timetable for relief from the very present strains of UIGEA. Congresswoman Berkley is bent on building cooperation, wherever she can. Will she bring these groups to the table? Can she facilitate a better game plan for both, as the reality of an uphill battle looms for the whole gaming industry? She has not discussed any specifics, but don’t be surprised if Congresswoman Berkley soon makes the effort to promote a meeting of the minds.

Poker Lessons in the Halls of Congress

I left Washington with clear advice for the poker industry; do the homework before skating too fast through the Halls of Congress. And as everyone who was anyone in Washington intoned: count the ways you can support your representatives in the nation’s capitol.

Watch for more bulletins

Stay tuned for more news from my recent Washington travels, and follow up to check out Alfonse D’Amato’s recent visit to the Isle of Man with online poker folks. Poker Stars, which has operations there, is is the most successful online poker site still working the United States market. It is rumored to be moving forward with a scholarly report that will prove poker is a game of skill rather than chance. Now, there’s a plan for the PPA!

Please note this article is substantively the same as the one that wil appear in the next print edition of Poker Player (March 19, 2007).

Fiorello’s song of politics and poker is fitting background music for Congresswoman Shelley Berkley. She is the Southern Nevada Congresswoman who is center stage as the entire gaming industry grapples with the impact of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. The UIGEA passed late last year attempts to end online betting by American-based players; Shelley Berkley’s district is filled with brick and mortar casinos and online gamers. She is as outraged by the passage of the legislation as are her diverse constituents within the gaming industry. She has her hands full.

Berkley asks representatives of the PPA and AGA to meet with her

It didn’t take long after the passage of UIGEA for Congresswoman Berkley to understand the difference in the agendas of two distinctly different groups. For the online operators, UIGEA poses immediate economic threats. They seek immediate relief with a bill that provides a poker carve-out from the UIGEA. For the commercial gaming industry, the ramifications of UIGEA are longer term,as the brick and mortar companies evaluate future business plans for online gaming as part of their portfolios. Commercial casino kings seek a bill to study online gaming, with a view toward legalization –against a backdrop of well-thought out regulation.

Two weeks ago, Shelley Berkley, who is poised to introduce the study bill, sent invitations to representatives of online gaming companies and commercial gaming corporations to meet with her in Las Vegas on her home turf. Terry Lanni, MGM’s Chairman of the Board, and Immediate Past Chairman of the American Gaming Association has been a particularly visible player in the online gaming debate and a supporter of the Congresswoman; online honchos have been anxious to get his ear. But he was among those who were absent for the meeting. He explained that scheduled travels precluded his attendance.

Ms. Berkley’s plans for legislative reform in response to the UIGEA would be easier if the brick and mortar casinos and the online gambling operators would work toward pushing one piece of legislation together rather than going off in independent directions. As we go to press, the odds of marrying their interests leave an opportunity for improvement.

The long-established American Gaming Association (AGA) represents the commercial casinos’ interests. The nascent Poker Players Alliance (PPA), reports an estimated three hundred thousand .members and hopes of attracting upwards of a million over the next months. The PPA holds itself out as the voice of online gaming interests with former Senator Alfonse D’Amato reportedly earning big bucks to act as the spokesman for the group. Ms. Berkley speaks of her affection for both segments of the industry. She is hopeful that they will find common ground in the battle to free the entire gaming industry from the shackles of the recently enacted UIGEA.

MGM Chief Lanni speaks out on online gaming

Shortly after the passage of the UIGEA, my longtime friend Terry Lanni chatted with me about the problems that are created as a result of the ACT, not to mention the “ridiculous” events surrounding its unexpected passage.

UIGEA was passed the last night of Congress immediately prior to last year’s mid term elections,as part of a Safe Port security bill,and without any debate in the Senate. Terry, who is extremely well informed about who is doing what to whom in Washington, took me through the political machinations that led to the passage of the UIGEA. He emphasizes that there are no quick fixes in the cards. The MGM/Mirage Chairman remains committed to the legislative posture he led as chairman of the AGA last spring, a bill to study online gaming issues. His mantra: license, tax and regulate. He has said publicly, “If we could add our brand, and the credibility of the publicly-traded United States gaming company, this could be a vast business.”

Shelley Berkley is Lanni’s “favorite Democrat”

Terry Lanni and his colleagues who populate the AGA have met with Shelley Berkley often and have considered a wide range of issues in their discussions,as to the most viable political position for the future of their businesses in the online gaming world. Terry, a high profile Republican who is backing John McCain for presidential nomination, calls his friend Shelley his “favorite Democrat.” He says, with obvious affection, “Shelley Berkley doesn’t take ‘yes’ for an answer.” He adds, “I know a lot of people in Washington who respond to her just to get Shelley Berkley off their backs.”

Just who is Shelley Berkley?

A daughter of immigrants, Shelly Berkley was born in New York City. She was raised in Nevada where her father worked as a waiter, determined to make good. Young Shelley was the first in the family to go to college. She earned her BA degree from the University of Nevada and a JD from the University of San Diego, defraying the costs of her higher education with a waitress job at the Sands Hotel. She always knew she wanted to be in public service. She was elected to the Nevada State Assembly in 1982.

Ms. Berkley later returned to the private sector, going back to her roots at the Sands. She moved up the ladder from her stints as a cocktail waitress and keno runner to become Vice President of Government and Legal Affairs for the casino. She earned more stripes as Chair of the Nevada Hotel and Motel Association. In 1999 she was elected to Congress, and has been re-elected ever since.

Berkley touts her strengths with pride

The Congresswoman is proud of the relationships she has cultivated within the industry and also of the rich knowledge she has gained, from the standpoint of both labor and management. She smiles from ear to ear as she sums up her indisputable status as a key player in the politics of gaming. She says, “I am my parents’ American dream.”

Berkley, the Choreographer

Congresswoman Berkley is outspoken about the travesty of the passage of the UIGEA bill. She is dedicated to her constituents, defending both commercial gaming interests, and her “poker guys,” in their efforts to attack the constraints that have been placed on the online gaming market.

For a while, the PPA publicly fueled hopes for a fast-track legislative bill that would provide a poker carve-out from UIGEA. Reports were flying; Congresswoman Berkley was purportedly poised to do the deed, on behalf of her “poker guys.”

It wasn’t long before AGA president, Frank Fahrenkopf Jr., took PPA president Michael Bolcerek, to task, saying, “No way in hell” to such an idea. He set the facts straight as he saw them. His casino kings were committed to a different bill that will study internet gambling issues. Shelly Berkley acknowledges she made a commitment to the AGA last spring to carry this water up Capitol Hill. She makes herself crystal clear; she has no intention of muddying the water. MGM/Mirage CEO and AGA’s immediate past chairman (2005-2006) Terry Lanni confirms his continued support for the study bill and for his longtime mantra on internet gambling: license, tax, and regulate.

Terry Lanni is a Berkley Fan

AGA members appreciate having Shelly Berkley in their corner. In February, Terry Lanni hosted a fundraiser for the Congresswoman at the MGM “Mansion.” A few days later he told me cheerfully that more than $300,000 had been raised for her coffers. He said it was a tribute to the popularity and respect she has earned. Terry says he has gotten to know his Congresswoman friend over some twenty years. I wanted to get to know her too.

I called Ms. Berkley, asking for a meeting in Washington as part of my research, both to educate my company’s gaming clients as well as for this story. I was a bit afraid my previously publicized affiliations with America’s Mayor and a Republican Governor might turn her off. I secured an appointment easily when I told her that our mutual friend Terry Lanni called her his favorite Democrat, and I was confident she would become my favorite Democrat, too.

Congresswoman Berkley remains centered

While Congresswoman Berkley appeared to be caught between the conflicting positions of the AGA and the PPA, she emphasized this was never the case.

The Congresswoman is as incensed as anyone over the enactment of UIGEA. She is sensitive to the potential economic disaster that could befall the online gaming community, noting that many online operators cannot survive the loss of business that a years-long wait would cause. With that said, however, she advises me her longstanding commitment to her commercial gaming constituents will soon see fruit with a “study bill” introduced through her office. Current plans call for it to be referred to the Judiciary Committee and perhaps others.

Berkley is making her move

Congresswoman Berkley hopes to bring the PPA and AGA into a closer accord, in an attempt to facilitate their cooperativeness in the legislative process. She says, “Communication is the key here.”

She explains her plans to sit down this week with members of the gaming community,from all sides,laying out the issues, and looking into the politics behind these issues. She insists, “This is how progress can be made. I am going to give my best gut feeling about the issues, and let them discuss it amongst themselves with me present.”

While internet gambling companies thirst for an immediate remedy to UIGEA, the savvy Congresswoman slows down the pace, indicating the need for long term organized efforts will have the best chance of overturning the UIGEA of 2006. She offers up the idea that more progress, and a more expeditious resolution is in the reach of the entire gaming industry if the different segments find ways to work more closely together. Will the commercial gaming industry kings now begin to refer to internet gambling sites as online gaming operations?

I will be close to the action, here in New York, presumably breathing out a sigh of relief. Poker Player discharged its responsibility to the public in reporting the PPA/D’Amato deal in an exclusive bulletin February 16th. Mr. D’Amato, professional that he is, has not run away from signing a contract out of fear of a tough job or for the jollies of proving a reporter wrong.

The former Senator is poised to head the PPA’s lobbying efforts as members of Congress return from a week long recess to resume voting activities in Washington.

Senator D’Amato will lead the charge for a poker exemption to the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act of 2006. The latest word in casino conference rooms, however, is that Mr. D’Amato may end up having to deal with a different bill that will delay a poker exemption in favor of a more global study of Internet gaming issues that reside in Pandora’s Box.

Over the next days, I’ll be spending time in Washington (on behalf of my day job), interviewing prospective counsel for clients. By mid week I’ll park myself at the Omni Shoreham Hotel which will be the center of the action for the Conservative Political Action Committee, as the CPAC Conference gets underway. In addition to hobnobbing with trespassing centrists in the crowd, and listening to political speeches (think top government officials and wannabees), I’ll be looking for reactions to the “Pothole” Senator’s new role high on the Hill.

Stay tuned for continuing bulletins and stories as poker unfolds on the stages of Washington.

In my spare time, I intend to be a drilling poker reporter all around, looking for chinks in the armor of a tough and rapidly expanding anti-gambling gang that plans to strut its stuff in the halls of Congress.

Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act of 2006

The three-term senator from New York has been courted by the PPA to represent the interests of the deep-pocketed online poker businesses in the aftermath of the enactment of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act of 2006. I’ll leave it to the legal journalists and law professors to opine on the complexities and debatable interpretations of its provisions. Suffice to say the new law attempts to end online betting by American-based players. Lawyers around the country say online gaming entrepreneurs who now take bets from American-based players are operating with significant peril of prosecution by an increasingly combative Department of Justice. Law firms will likely become the biggest beneficiaries of UIGEA, unless the law is repealed or a carve-out for poker is obtained post haste. I have yet to find a single CEO of a public gaming company who believes relief is in the cards anytime soon.

Reporter Disclosures

Enter Alfonse D’Amato on behalf of the PPA. Before proceeding further, I should say here, there was a time when Mr. D’Amato and I had a strained nodding acquaintanceship over my dual friendship with Rudy Giuliani (who I strongly support for the presidential nomination) and George Pataki (for whom I continue to have great respect). It was during a period where I took leave from my business, to do a short stint in Mr. Pataki’s first administration as the Governor’s first assistant and senior advisor.

I operated as an independent thinker. I never kissed any Republican’s ring, and I was on a different page from many of the Senator’s close friends. With that said, and a reputation for calling issues as I see them, I offer fair warning to my friends who are D’Amato skeptics, you will not be happy here.

The Poker Industry Has Flopped The Nuts With Alfonse D’Amato

More than two weeks ago, I came to learn that Mr. D’Amato’s role as Chairman of the PPA had been ratified at a meeting of its Board of Directors.

A genius move-the right blend of street smarts, charm, and chutzpah to go with his experience in Congress and every other corridor of political power.

Treading Water

I decided to hold up a report of this news as result of a discussion with Michael Bolcerek, president of the PPA. He explained there were sensitive issues to be worked through in the proposed transaction. I also learned that no contract had yet been signed. In the past days, however, well-founded rumors of a deal were rampant. I was holding a disintegrated secret. Then there were logistics issues: I was obliged to share the facts as I knew them with the publisher of Poker Player.

Based on my conversation with Mr. Bolcerek, I planned to break the story when the official news was rolled out to certain mainstream press. I expected to do a story for the same day with the PPA’s cooperation and in front of any other poker publication.

The Decision to Report the Deal

Several developments sent me to my word processor, last Friday, making Poker Player the first to report that the PPA had tapped Mr. D’Amato as its chairman prior to “official confirmations.”

On February 12th, an online site raised the curtain on the rumors of a planned relationship between Mr. D’Amato and the PPA.

The next day, Mr. Bolcerek responded to a query from New York Newsday, making formal acknowledgement of the talks. I had not expected this to happen prior to publishing my story. Then I learned that Mr. D’Amato was slated to give an exclusive interview to a poker media executive/journalist, before Poker Player would have an opportunity to interview him. Lastly, the unsigned contract was beginning to look like a facade, once I heard it was a done deal from a major gaming company CEO who was familiar with the negotiations.

There was no longer any way to convince Poker Player’s publisher that a further delay was responsible journalism. The business of online poker is on a straight path to headline news.

PPA Takes to the Stage.

Now, let me step back to last spring, and set the stage for the pending arrival of Alphonse D’Amato on the scene. With well-founded fears of anti-gaming legislation on the near-horizon, the nascent PPA united the leaders of several major online poker sites. The purpose was single-minded; a bid to convince Congress to separate poker from variously proposed legislation that had labored in both Houses for years, without resolution.

The San Francisco based and Washington savvy Mr. Bolcerek got moving quickly. In addition to gaining the services of lobbying counsel, the PPA President chaperoned high profile poker players Howard Lederer, Chris Ferguson, and Greg Raymer to the Capitol to learn the ropes of schmoozing with movers and shakers on the Hill.

During the festivities of the 2006 World Series of Poker, the PPA hosted a reception. The Washington-traveled poker pros sounded promising notes, as they told an SRO crowd of the positive reception they had received in the nation’s august legislative chambers. They also cautioned that the PPA was dependent upon grass roots support to make the industry’s voice loudly heard in Congress. Mr. Bolcerek called the assembled guests to arms, pleading for checks in support of the looming battle.

Dirty Tricks in Congress

The collective efforts of PPA lobbyists and poker pros Lederer, Ferguson, and Raymer proved no match for the wily, hi-stakes smooth calls of Bill Frist. The UIGEA of 2006 was tacked on to a popular Safe Port security bill, which, after passage in the House, Mr. Frist successfully rammed through the Senate in the very last moments of the Congressional session-without an iota of debate.

The UIGEA legislation was signed into law by the President, October 13, 2006. To be sure this could not enhance the birthday celebrations that day for tournament player extraordinaire T. J. Cloutier, or Henry Orenstein, creator of the popular High Stakes poker show on GSN, not to mention Yours Truly, who spent the day fielding calls from international gaming clients far beyond the world of poker.

Fallout Expands

Numerous online gaming businesses, particularly public companies, determined with their counsels that they were on the ropes in America. The remaining active players were put into a tailspin, scrambling for the most prompt and savvy advice to help them through the maze of the new legislation. There has been a domino effect. Related businesses are evaluating the economic fallout, as pressures mount for online gaming companies to abandon the American market.

Senator D’Amato Knows his Stuff

Enter Alfonse D’Amato. The PPA is putting big chips in the pot, looking to Senator D’Amato as the best advocate for the poker industry. If he and the Federalist Group with whom he will collaborate are able to succeed in their efforts, the benefits will be felt far beyond the interests of big online gaming companies. Senator D’Amato is well known for his commitment to the little people among his constituents as well as big business, and his interest in poker is sincere. He has been an avid player in home games for years.

The Senator will bring to the table his credentials as a mover and shaker about town and on the Hill, and likewise, his passion for winning. He will also bring sincerity to the more global cause of the estimated 140,000 members of the PPA. Indeed, with Alfonse D’Amato on board, PPA President, Michael Bolcerek’s chances of attracting the million-plus members he seeks, may be exponentially increased. Who could be a better pick to advocate for the right to play poker in your pajamas, if you may be so inclined, in the privacy of your own home?

D’Amato Can Be Charming

Alfonso, as he has introduced himself to more than a few ladies during his dating days, following separation and then divorce from his first wife, remarried the youthful Katuria Smith, in 2004. A lawyer, she has been described as the front and center cheerleader of his new career, while bringing him the wisdom one might expect from someone far beyond her years.

A Proven Lobbyist

A review of his company’s lobbying income shows that since marrying Katuria Smith, lobbying revenues have more than tripled. There may be many explanations for Mr. D’Amato’s post-Congress success, but no one describes his formidable talent as an advocate better than the Senator, himself.

In a penetrating interview with New York Magazine, Mr. D’Amato summed up his value as a consultant and lobbyist. He said, “In the Senate, I loved the battles. I loved winning things that everyone thought were impossible to win. Now I do the same thing for clients. I’m the best. I am. If you want an advocate, and you’re bein’ wronged, you want me, because I’ll find where to go, how to go, and what to do.” The PPA is banking on Senator D’Amato.

The key players continue to jockey for position in timing the announcements to various media, but the die has been cast; former New York Senator Alfonse D’Amato has been tapped to sit as the Chairman of the Poker Players Alliance. The PPA has grand plans, on behalf of an outraged poker community, to fight for a poker exemption to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. This legislation attempts to end online betting by American-based players. The PPA is putting big chips in the pot with expectations that Mr. D’Amato can turn the tide and re-secure the freedom for adults to play poker in pajamas- with a cyberspace seat in the comfort of their homes.

Two weeks ago, a confidential source who holds a powerful post in the gaming industry told me that it was a done deal. I did not let any grass grow under these feet. I called Michael Bolcerek, president of the San Francisco-based PPA and told him what I had heard. The phone went suddenly silent. He then demurred, saying there was no deal, and insisting I was way ahead of any story that might be appropriate.

As a result of my discussion with Mr. Bolcerek, I held up a report, not the least reason being that soon thereafter, I heard similarly from another source inside the Beltway. I was told, ” D’Amato’s election took place at a meeting he did not attend, and no contract has yet been signed.” In a telephone interview today, Mr. Bolcerek still assures me, “There is no signed contract.” But if I were a betting woman, I’d bet the ranch on this one. You can too. For more of the details that I have learned about Mr. D’Amato’s highly anticipated role and the political maneuvering that is in the works, stay tuned for my fuller report over the weekend.

It is easy to miss the subtleties, nuances, and signals that occur in every exchange. It is also easy to catch them by obeying the “listening laws” that are part of my 12-Step System to People Reading Excellence- formulated from decades of experience in reading people in business, politics, and card rooms.

At the poker table, careful attention to these listening laws helps substantially maximize winnings, and minimize losses. The key to this positive state of affairs in my own poker experience is a consistent effort to splice into my read of an opponent not only what he says, but also other audio connections to the hand; the dealer’s interactions, a whispered conversation between two players that are not involved in the hand, the words of a friendly “sweater” at the opponent’s side, or a floor person’s ruling.

Listening for audio clues and taking notice of silence are similarly important, as is eyeballing facial movements and neck pulse.

Common sense and pure logic are your friends at the poker table in validating both oral data and pointed silence.

But no matter how enamored I may be with the notion of womanly intuition, I know that my own results improve markedly with continued validation and adjustments of intuitive impressions of the players in a transaction- from the card room to the board room. In fact, I have watched more bankrolls evaporate in an instant in ‘bet the ranch’ negotiations thanks to intuition that has gone awry.

In a fast paced poker game, the proficient listener has a big edge. One of my 10 listening laws calls for customizing questions for the person and the situation with a view toward eliciting fast relevant answers rather than defensive or nasty replies. Consider the following before you leap into a full on engagement:

1. Are there specific pieces of information you are attempting to obtain? If so, how can you frame a conversation that will lead to this information without direct interrogation?

2. Are you trying to get a “baseline” reading of a person for better interpretation of subsequent interactions?

3. Do you have background information about the person’s current level of self esteem? Do you have information about this person that should be kept quiet?

4. Does the person to whom you will be speaking have specific expectations of you?

5. Is your opposite going to try to rush you into judgment or exert other pressure?

6. How do you feel? Are you clear-minded and in control? Are you calm, grounded, and confident in your own position?

7. Do you appear to be an empathetic listener? Is your demeanor an asset or a liability at the moment?

8. On a scale from ‘life and death’ to casual banter, how important is this transaction or poker hand that is in progress and how much do your feeling show through?

9. If the interaction takes a surprising downturn, will you be able to remain centered?

10. What do you think the other person thinks that you are thinking about his answers?

Listening

Law 5 directs the people reading student to “Be in the Now and Stay There.” The thoughtful listener tunes his ear both to the content of an answer and the style of delivery, recognizing that the care you take in framing questions will be reflected in the time it takes to unmask disingenuous answers. Your people reads are only as good as your understanding of the effect you have on the person you are trying to gauge. In poker, the pros excel at playing the player.

How To Listen To the Answers

Obviously, being a good listener is the flip side to being a good questioner. It starts with a simple precept: allow others to say what they want to say fully. The experienced people-reader does not worry about an orderly probe. It will flow naturally from his progressive read.

Questions can be presented in a wide variety of postures and guises-informational, open-ended, casual, humorous, rhetorical, confrontational, seductive, etc. Likewise answers can be filled with spin. A good listener hears with trained ears. In any negotiation, I listen to answers with special attention to how a person responds. Are there points of emphasis, repetitions, significant pauses, or nervous coughs? The modulation of tone is always significant, as is the speed and the volume of a voice. But in a poker game there is precious little time to chat up an opponent so as to peel away the layers of meaning in his banter. Ergo, the test bet is often the dynamite “listening” tool…

Silence can be a more complex response to unravel than long winded words. I ask myself constantly, “Am I hearing evasion or deliberate omissions?” Visual cues frequently come to the rescue in a crisis of silence; body language and facial expressions reveal much about a person’s comfort level, his attitude, and reactions to certain subject matters. Indeed, the way the person uses his eyes while answering questions is almost always a useful indication of thoughts behind the words. Does he maintain eye contact? Does he blink excessively? Does he look down during some answers and up on others?

Thankfully, all but the most savvy poker players have body and behavior tells that can be deciphered with common sense.

Nevertheless, the silent treatment can be unnerving and frustrating. But let’s face it: you are not always so lucky as to be dealing with a chatterbox!

So what do you do when you are stared down or someone is acting as if he is hard of hearing? At the poker table you can’t afford to let the other party shut down your fact gathering apparatus-part of which is interaction with him. It is in your interest to learn the general modus operandi and habits of an opponent in a negotiation of any sort. If you know that the odds are that the silent treatment will emerge as a regular part of a poker player’s table image, your best bet is to try to create an amiable relationship with him-away from the table…

If you ask innocuous, non-threatening questions when he is not in the throes of a big pot, there is a chance that he’ll exempt you from the silent treatment at a critical moment in a hand against him later. In poker, most players are more on guard while engaged in a hand. The hats, sunglasses, and silence are part of the camouflage outfit that competitors wear for special effect – the Game Face. If you see someone- in any situation- wearing his Game Face, you’re going to have to break through the façade, or go around it, in order to get any revealing insights. Between hands, or before and after the game, poker players are generally more willing to chat and socialize as a means of relaxation.

This is a good time to get baseline readings about an opponent’s demeanor; insure that any prior stress with you has fully dissipated, first. Take special note of voice modulations, and eye connections in a non-provocative environment. When he replies with enthusiastic praise for “Phantom of the Opera,” I note his gestures, how his eyes light up, vocal inflections- loudness, pitch, etc.

These reactions will provide you with reliable reads of the person’s behavior when he is on a more even keel – neither excited by the sudden prospect of a winning hand, nor nervous about bluffing with modest cards.

Well, a few hours or days later when I ask him how he likes his hand, even if he does give me the silent treatment, I may get clues from his demeanor. If he replies with the same tone of enthusiasm, I have reason to suspect that he has a good hand. If his response is slower, lower, with eyes averted- even if he tells me the cards are running hot for him- I might have good reason to suspect that he is bluffing.

Other than the most disciplined pros- who know how to use “the silent treatment” as a powerful weapon- most silent players have “tells” or giveaway behavior that an attentive listener/observer can read and understand. You’ll find that a majority of the quiet ones in any negotiation- at the poker table or the conference table- fall into silence as a form of insecurity. They don’t know what to do to protect themselves from giving out revealing signals of weakness and therefore settle on trying to conceal their feelings entirely. With these insecure types, know that your calculated momentary silence in interactions with them can be more powerful than theirs with you. And in any negotiation, sometimes it’s best to wait a second or two before jumping into the dialogue. If you don’t speak right up, a nervous person is likely to keep right on talking in order to fill the awkward void, giving you valuable information that might otherwise go by the boards.

Questions and answers are the most fundamental and formidable verbal interaction people have. By being aware of the different kinds of information that is provided in these exchanges, you develop sophistication as a people reader that most men and women never consciously develop. If you Obey Your Listening Laws in my 12-Step System to People Reading Excellence you will score home runs in the evaluation process of others’ answers.

Ms Eolis has decades of experience as an expert people reader in business, politics, and card rooms. The CEO of EOLIS International Group, she formed the People Reading Institute to offer to the public, seminars, lectures and coaching in her 12-Step System to People Reading Excellence. Wendeen was the he first woman to cash in the final event of the WSOP and has proved that she has staying power with another four WSOP cashes (most recently in 2006) as well as her election to membership on the WPT’s Inaugural Professional Poker Tour.

“Why are you asking?” and “What do you mean?”

These questions are powerful probes- and asking productive questions is a key element of my negotiating strategy in business, politics, and poker parlors. At the poker table your earning power is determined in large measure by your proficiency in the use of the PEP Principle.

Put the PEP Principle to Work

Probe, evaluate, and perform accordingly- PEP, combines the use of appropriate questions for specific situations, with analysis of answers from different vantage points. PEP calls for logic and common sense, both in the development of information, and the use of practical strategies to gauge the relevance and credibility of responses.

In the face of an inquisitive opponent at the poker table, one who asks you needling questions in the midst of the hand, it is well worth considering my childhood practice of lobbing back a query of your own rather than answering the question that was asked. This often allows you to glean more facts about his hand as well as his mind-set in engaging you. It also helps you to avoid acting precipitously.

But like most strategies at the poker table, you must be flexible and able to adjust to the particulars of the game at hand.

Long before I arrived at a poker table, I learned that the heart of a winning deal resides in your ability to get the other side to respond usefully to you as you proceed through a negotiation. As a kid, my parents had viewed my rapid fire challenges as cute and as indicators of “smarts.” However as a young adult, in a common law marriage with three children in tow, my kneejerk questions frequently led to the dreaded “silent treatment” in the family room. From time to time I tried to dislodge such dismissal by asking my husband, “Am I talking to myself?” The usual answer was “No, I hear you. I don’t want to talk about it.” Then, one night, after a heated debate that I was not anxious to let go, I asked this question and got a different answer: “No, you are not talking to yourself, but you should be!” That incident served as powerful instruction for the poker table: pause long enough to take the pulse of another person’s receptivity, before diving head first into a quiz during a poker hand.

Pause, Reflect, and Evaluate Receptivity

I ask myself: “How would I feel about coffee housing, “trash talk” or just some friendly banter if I were in the other player”s shoes?” I consider the personalities, the complexity of the decisions to be made in the hand, the emotional content of the questions I am inclined to ask, the sensitivity of the opponent to “in your face” tactics, and the pressure of the environment,be it a friendly low level cash game or a final table at the World Series of Poker.

These considerations are critical underpinnings of my PEP Principle in a card room. They can be adapted and/or be applied equally to personnel shuffles in the office, family budget cuts during a recession, and card room deals where worldly pros are more prone to stare in space than bare their soul.

PEP Reflections at the Poker Table

If you take the time to consider another person’s receptivity and ask yourself questions before plunging into a probe you subscribe to my “Slow-it-Down Gambit.” Nowhere is it more necessary to control the flow than in a fast-paced high stakes poker game. Here your adversary is invariably anxious to persuade you to respond without thinking things through carefully. “Slow-it-Down Gambit”. The Slow-it-Down Gambit is a well placed pause that buys time to consider your adversary’s actions and words, and/or to consider and analyze your judgments, reflectively.

At the poker table this component of PEP has turned tough calls into some of my most profitable decisions. Rarely, however, has my Slow-it- Down Gambit gotten as much applause as I got at the 1986 World Series of Poker (“WSOP”).

Ten months after I took down my first pot in a serious No Limit Hold ‘Em game, I jumped into the grand finale of the WSOP, which had a purse larger than the three golf majors combined. At my table everyone was acting relaxed and friendly,that is until I picked up a solid pair of jacks as my hole cards and made a substantial raise.

The good ole Texan across the table called quickly, saying, “Ya’ think ya” got somethin’ babe?” Since I had a very respectable pair, and my opponent just called, I was pretty sure I had the best hand. I smiled, weakly. I wasn’t about to help him out. Previously slack-jawed and slumped comfortably in his chair, the Texan cowboy pulled himself up short.

Suddenly he was eyeing me as if I was about to become chopped liver. The dealer flipped up 9-7-2 on the flop. My opponent leaned way back, again, as he considered his next move. I followed his lead, allowing myself plenty of time to ponder a bunch of relevant questions (in no particular order):

An Introspective PEP Talk before I Acted at the Poker Table

The questions I ask myself at the poker table are adaptable for negotiations at any other competitive table-including even the round table in my family room!

1. What relevant background information do I have about him?

2. Can I beat him at his own game of banter?

3. Do I have a good baseline reading of his credibility?

4. Does he have specific expectations as to how I will act in this situation?

5. How quickly should I react to his moves?

6. Am I clear minded in my decision making process?

7. Is my physical appearance and demeanor an asset here?

8. How important is it for me to be engaged in this matter?

9. If events take an unexpected turn, can I remain centered?

10. How do I think he thinks this exchange is going?

By giving myself a PEP talk while the good ole Texan pondered his next move, I was primed for his cocksure demand: “Honey, how much mo’ money you got?”

An earlier confrontation at the table between him and Betty Carey suddenly flashed before my eyes.

Betty was widely regarded as the most courageous female poker player of all time. The good ole Texan had leaned back right before he made his move against her, calling her a transparent liar as he “came over the top” with a big raise. Betty read him for nothing more than a hand full of perspiration. She made the call, exposing his stone cold bluff. She hauled in a nice chunk of change.

In my case the Texan’s aggression was more playful. I suspected that he had better holdings than he had with Betty. Still, I saw the obvious parallel.

I asked myself, “Is there any other reason he might be trying to intimidate me?”

Sorting through the alternative ways I might solidify my read, I settled on a strategy of understated confidence. If the Texan put his foot on the bully accelerator pedal, I’d give his bravura credit for a bad act.

“Can the dealer just count me down?” I asked the cowboy coyly. “Alrighty,” he replied, waving his hand in disgust. “Dealer, count her down.”

Then as I stacked my chips neatly in front of me, my swaggering opponent said, “Honey, I’m puttin’ it all-in,” as he shoved his stacks toward the center of the table. Smirking, he teased, “Trust me, it feels better in.”

I took a moment to ask myself, “Is he thinking that I am just some sugar daddy’s honey who has no business in this game?” Again I leaned back slowly in my chair, this time pretty confident that I had him pegged, but not ready to go for the kill just yet. I deadpanned, “Should I call?” Then, to test him one more time, I added deliberately, “You are all in, aren’t you?” “Yeah, baby, I already told you, it feels better in.”

That second little lasso of crude innuendo cemented my strategy. My two jacks had to be good. The cowboy definitely wanted me to fold. This was the perfect reason to make the call.

Forced to show me his hand before I had to show mine, he turned over pocket tens. My jacks won. I did better than the Great Betty Carey!

I quietly pulled in all of his chips to a grand round of applause from the ladies in the stands.

The next guy who came to the table to take the good ole Texan’s seat gave the dealer a big “hello there” and cast me a wink. Seeing that I had just taken over as the table leader, he glanced at his racks of chips and added, “Honey, do I have enough to bust you?”